This is really a follow-on to an earlier discussion..
In past writings, I have alluded to the existence of an objective truth. Objective right and wrong. Objective good, and evil. I have lamented in those writings the fact that we seem totally unable as individuals as a collective as a country as a culture to identify evil. The very concept seems to have been erased from our collective conscious, and certainly it is being regulated out of existence.
I have also sought, in these writings to avoid overt leanings on my Christian faith, to establish these grounds on the secular and the logical. However, in the doing I have come to notice something with increasing frequency. That being, that the more logical an atheist is or the agnostic is in seeking to identify objective good and evil, right and wrong, the more they tend to parallel what believers already know on an instinctive level.
I notice for example the conflict in agnostics and atheists in their quest to separate church and state their logic brings them to the point of admitting that a believer has had the labels correctly positioned on right and wrong all along. Yet. because those positions echo what the church says, the instinct of the atheist is to dismiss them, and often to use the power of government to prevent us as a people from adopting them.
Rather reminds one of the old tale of all about the cat and the buttered toast. Buttered toast always falls buttersidedown to the ground, and cats always land on their feet. Power. The atheists and agnostics come to the conclusion that the church had it right all along, if you can’t bring themselves to admit that discovery. Round and round it goes. It seems we have discovered another inexhaustible source of power.
I say this not to insult. Indeed I respect the logic involved. It takes some serious logical power to arrive at the position were talking about. Where I have the problem is where simply because the church agrees with their conclusion and always has, they resist that solution. They resist the only logical conclusion to draw. It’s rather like a drowning man refusing a life preserver because it’s the wrong color.
You can call the discovered parallels I shared here, experience, or you can call them I suppose heavenly dictates. Either way, the parallel exists. I believe however that the difference in reaction is because of man’s natural tendency to want to live without anyone or anything ruling over him, including God.